> That’s because the ethnicity of a criminal is usually not a relevant detail.

That’s a big assumption rooted in a moral framework rather than in objective science.

In a news report about an individual crime?

Lets say a hate crime was committed against Jews. Do you assume it was a Nazi, or an Islamist? This pops up all the time in Europe, usually it is Islamists but sometimes it is Nazis, and that makes a huge difference when interpreting what the crime means.

Or for this case, lets say the perpetrator was of Chinese origin instead of Japanese. Do you think that wouldn't be relevant at all?

If the person was Chinese yes that would be an important consideration wrt the motive

> That’s because the ethnicity of a criminal is usually not a relevant detail.

Come on, don't be coy. There are many things which aren't relevant like where the criminal is from or how old he is.

The reason they hide the ethnicity is because it helps racists to profile.

The problem is that they go too far the other way, like labeling Kyle Rittenhouse, not just white, but a white supremacist without any evidence.

Age and location are necessary to avoid confusion based on name, and are much more effective at doing so than race which has the added problem of fueling racism.